Dating Revelation - combined internal evidences for AD 60

[Josheb]

Not if Luke died first. Tongue in cheek response, as I would need to recheck some history in order to know if we have any evidence as to whether he did or didn't.

Tradition has Luke dying in 84 AD, or between 84 and 100 AD. Curious Luke did not mention John's exile if Acts was written after that event. Luke did not mention most of the twelve. The book titled, "The Acts of the Apostles" is predominantly about only two apostles, Paul and Peter. Therefore, it is reasonable NOT to expect reports of Thomas, Abdrew, Bartholomew, etc. since that history does not include all eleven of the surviving post-Calvary eleven. Luke accompanied Paul so that's who the record reports on. According to Paul, Luke was with Paul when he wrote the Colossians (c. 62 AD), Philemon (c. 61-62), and Timothy (c. 68). Tradition has Paul and Peter executed in 65-68 AD. This supposedly happened at the hand of Nero and his reign ended in 68 AD.

 

[Marty]

Something needs to be understood by everyone in the thread: The book of Revelation explicitly states the things described in John's vision were near, or at hand. The book does NOT state, "When X occurs then Y will be near." That's how futurists read the "near" but that is not what the text of Revelation ever actually states. However, even if we ignore the "near," we have Revelation 1:19 stating, "Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things." That verse means some of what is reporting in Revelation was in John's past. He'd already seen those things. Not a single part of anything that he'd already seen is in the future. That means it is incumbent upon every reader of Revelation - and therefore every participant in this thread - to correctly discern which portions of Revelation were in John's past. All of that then can be removed from this discussion because NONE of it is future. The exact same metric applies to "the things which are." If they were events happening in John's day then only events that have continued to occur over the course of the last 2000 years can be said to be relevant to any futurism. Anything and everything specifically relate to first century Judaism or first century imperial Rome can automatically be discarded from any and all futurism because those two conditions - conditions which John observed - no longer exist. It is, therefore, incumbent upon every reader of Revelation - and therefore every participant in this thread - to correctly discern which parts of Revelation pertain to the things that were in John's day and discard them from any futurism.

That means only the parts of Revelation that pertain to "the things which will take place after these things," are the only parts that could rationally be part of any futurism.

If we were to divide Revelation into thirds based on those three stipulations (and I am not saying equal thirds is correct) then only one third of Revelation could be future. Every poster who wantonly treats the entirety of Revelation as ALL in the future has blatantly ignored what is stated in verse 1:19. We do not need the "near," to understand a significant portion of Revelation had passed before the vision was given.



One example of something in Revelation that John had seen, something that was in his past, is the birth of the son born to the woman in Revelation 12.

Revelation 12:1-17
A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; and she was with child; and she *cried out, being in labor and in pain to give birth. Then another sign appeared in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads were seven diadems. And his tail *swept away a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she gave birth he might devour her child. And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and to His throne. Then the woman fled into the wilderness where she *had a place prepared by God, so that there she would be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, "Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, he who accuses them before our God day and night. "And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death. "For this reason, rejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them. Woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, knowing that he has only a short time." And when the dragon saw that he was thrown down to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male child. But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she *was nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent. And the serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, so that he might cause her to be swept away with the flood. But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and drank up the river which the dragon poured out of his mouth. So the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.

Most Christians, most eschatologies consider the son to be Christ and the woman to be either Israel or Mary but it does not matter which interpretation is held because the fact is Jesus has already been born, whether he is considered the offspring of Israel or the offspring of Mary, that milestone has come and gone. The entire chapter is past-tense. Jesus has been born. Salvation, his power, and the kingdom with the authority of Christ have come. Many other verses in the gospels, the history of Acts, and the epistolary tell us this is true.


Now here's an example that will shake up this conversation: the binding of satan.

Revelation 20:1-6
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; and he threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short time. Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

The one specific thing for which satan was bound was that he would deceive the nations no longer. What if this too was an event in John's past and not our future?

Isaiah records the falling of satan. Jesus stated he'd seen satan fall from heaven (Lk. 10:18). Jude 1 explicitly states the angels who did not keep their proper abode have been bound in bonds of eternal darkness awaiting their day of judgment. Romans tells us the wages of sin is death and sin enslaves. Therefore, satan was bound be sin like everyone else who disobeys God the moment he disobeyed God AND THEN he was cast out of heaven and bound in eternal bonds of darkness.

The gospel spread through the Law into the incarnation through Calvary and the resurrection and then through the NT era in the epistolary right on up to modernity where nowadays the gospel covers the earth.

Colossians 1:21-23
And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach— if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.

According to Paul the gospel had been preached in all creation by the time he wrote to the Colossians .

I am not saying this is correct. What I am saying is that much of Revelation is said to have already occurred in Revelation 1:19 and anyone who ignores 1:19 is going to end up with a bad date for when Revelation was written. So do not ignore verse 1:19.

This below is a very important point too

Daniel 12:4
But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.”

Daniel was told that his given prophecies were in his future but John was told something different

Revelation 22:10
Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near.

 

[Josheb]

This below is a very important point too

Daniel 12:4
But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.”

Daniel was told that his given prophecies were in his future but John was told something different

Revelation 22:10
Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near.

Yep.

Especially if read exactly as written with the understanding those words were understood by John and his original first-century audience... exactly as written, and in the scripture-rendering-scripture context recognizing Daniel had been told to seal up the scrolls until the time of the end, and the ends of the ages had come upon the NT-era Church (1 Cor. 10:11), and John was told to leave the prophesies unsealed because the time was at hand.


1 Corinthians 10:11
Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.

The ends of the ages had come upon Paul and the saints in Corinth circa 57 AD!


Dispensationalists, ironically, claim to read scripture literally but this is one of the many examples where the text of scripture is not read literally (with the ordinary meaning of the words in normal, everyday usage).
.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Now here's an example that will shake up this conversation: the binding of satan.

Revelation 20:1-6
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; and he threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short time. Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

The one specific thing for which satan was bound was that he would deceive the nations no longer. What if this too was an event in John's past and not our future?

A bit off my topic, but I agree - Satan's binding was in John's past. The literal thousand-year binding of Satan began in 968/967 BC with Solomon's temple foundation stone being laid down, and it ended in AD 33 with Christ and that "First resurrection" of the "First-fruits". That was the time when Christ became the Chief Cornerstone foundation of the spiritual temple not made with hands.

The millennium ended when Christ ascended and the devil descended.

 

[CrowCross]

170/1 B.C.-164/3 B.C. 70th week or 7 years

170/1 B.C. Onias 3rd is murdered (cut off and has nothing) the second anointed one the last of the Zadokite priesthood which was the start of the 70th week.

167 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanies 4th desecrates the temple ½ way through the 70th week. The abomination that caused desolation.

164/3 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanies 4th dies and the temple sacrifice is reestablished the end of the 70th week. (the end is poured out on him)

War continued during and until the end of the 70th week

Remember the 70 weeks were given to Daniel as an answer to his prayer in the first part of Daniel chapter 9 thus it was for them in the past before Jesus was born not for us today. All of these events happened to the Jews after Daniel was given the prophecies if you were a Jew living in the time of the Maccabees who would you think that the 70th week was about?

When Jesus was cut off...the clock was stopped so to speak. The last week has not been fulfilled. The last week can be seen in the book of Revelation which hasn't happened as of yet and will begin when triggered by the rapture of the Church.

 

[CrowCross]

A bit off my topic, but I agree - Satan's binding was in John's past. The literal thousand-year binding of Satan began in 968/967 BC with Solomon's temple foundation stone being laid down, and it ended in AD 33 with Christ and that "First resurrection" of the "First-fruits". That was the time when Christ became the Chief Cornerstone foundation of the spiritual temple not made with hands.

The millennium ended when Christ ascended and the devil descended.

The bible says that Satan had chains wrapped around him and was fastened to a large rock when Jesus was tempted by Satan in the wilderness.

 

[CrowCross]

Revelation 12:1-17
A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; and she was with child; and she *cried out, being in labor and in pain to give birth.

Some might find this interesting....not saying it is, just interesting.

Biblical signs in the sky on September 23, 2017?....article.​

 

[Josheb]

A bit off my topic, but I agree - Satan's binding was in John's past. The literal thousand-year binding of Satan began in 968/967 BC with Solomon's temple foundation stone being laid down, and it ended in AD 33 with Christ and that "First resurrection" of the "First-fruits". That was the time when Christ became the Chief Cornerstone foundation of the spiritual temple not made with hands.

The millennium ended when Christ ascended and the devil descended.

I would place the binding much earlier and not treat the mention of "a thousand years" literally, but the point I was making was that much of Revelation is in either John's past or John's present and therefore not in our future. Many think the binding of satan still future to us but that might not be the case. I've read about twenty commentaries on Revelation, and I do not think I have ever read one saying the millennium is past. My using the binding of satan as an example was partly intended to shake things up and get people thinking about (properly applying) Revelation 1:19. I recently read John MacArthur's commentary of Revelation (which I consider lame) and he argued for a literal reading of the text and stated the letters to the seven churches was about congregations in the first century but if he reads the text literally then how does he reconcile the mention of "world" in Rev. 3:10?

Revelation 3:10
Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

Most (if not all) of us partial-prets would say that "the world" is a reference to the known world of the first century or a reference to the land and people with whom God covenanted, or God's house, because the word used is "oikoumenes," and not "kosmos." The root of "oikoumenes" (oikos) is "house" . Either way, how can the letter to those called out in Philadelphia be about the first century congregations in that city and the entire planet? MacArthur never explains that conflict; it is nowhere evident in his book he was even aware he'd created one. The point being (so as not to digress from the purpose of dating Revelation) if the letters to the seven churches are part of John's present (and I agree with MacArthur that they are) then so too is that mention of the oikoumenes. Therefore, the world being referenced in Rev. 3:10 is the world of the first century, and not the world of the 21st century. The irony (again) being partial-prets read the text more literally than the Dispensationalist and other modern futurists.

Oikoumenes is used two other times in Revelation.

Revelation 12:9
And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Revelation 16:13-14
And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs; for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty.

In the Revelation 12 the oikoumenes is tied to satan having been thrown down to earth, which Isaiah and Jesus tell us happened long, long before John was shown the visions of Revelation. Revelation 1:19 applies. Similarly, in Revelation 16 the oikoumenes is tied to "the kings of the whole world." According to secular history much of the world had not been discovered and was not inhabited. There were no kings of the whole world in the first century when Revelation was written (whether early-dated or late-dated) so the text cannot be read literally.* In all likelihood, Revelation 16:14 is a reference taken from Lamentations. Foreshadowing the siege of Jerusalem the prophet Jeremiah said,

Lamentations 4:1-22 (edited for the sake of space)
How dark the gold has become, How the pure gold has changed! The sacred stones are poured out at the corner of every street. The precious sons of Zion, weighed against fine gold, how they are regarded as earthen jars, the work of a potter's hands! Even jackals offer the breast, they nurse their young; but the daughter of my people has become cruel like ostriches in the wilderness. The tongue of the infant cleaves To the roof of its mouth because of thirst; the little ones ask for bread, but no one breaks it for them. Those who ate delicacies are desolate in the streets; those reared in purple embrace ash pits. For the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than the sin of Sodom........... Better are those slain with the sword Than those slain with hunger; for they pine away, being stricken for lack of the fruits of the field. The hands of compassionate women boiled their own children; They became food for them because of the destruction of the daughter of my people. The LORD has accomplished His wrath, He has poured out His fierce anger; and He has kindled a fire in Zion which has consumed its foundations. The kings of the earth did not believe, nor did any of the inhabitants of the world, that the adversary and the enemy could enter the gates of Jerusalem. Because of the sins of her prophets and the iniquities of her priests, who have shed in her midst the blood of the righteous.... Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom, who dwells in the land of Uz; but the cup will come around to you as well, you will become drunk and make yourself naked. The punishment of your iniquity has been completed, O daughter of Zion; He will exile you no longer. But He will punish your iniquity, O daughter of Edom; He will expose your sins!

Paul and Peter had preached the gospel in the courts of Nero and he did not believe. None of the kings believed the enemy could enter the gates of Jerusalem but even God's temple was infested with the enemy by the time Jesus showed up. Fire was kindled in Zion. Jeremiah was not the only prophet who predicted this. David, Isaiah, and Zephaniah did so also. Jesus referenced them all in his judgment of Jerusalem..... in the first century.

 

[Josheb]

Part 2:

Paul and Peter had preached the gospel in the courts of Nero and he did not believe. None of the kings believed the enemy could enter the gates of Jerusalem but even God's temple was infested with the enemy by the time Jesus showed up. Fire was kindled in Zion. Jeremiah was not the only prophet who predicted this. David, Isaiah, and Zephaniah did so also. Jesus referenced them all in his judgment of Jerusalem..... in the first century.

Matthew 23:34-38
"Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!"

The house (oikos) of the Pharisees was desolate. The day before, when Jesus entered Jerusalem (Mt. 21), he'd cleaned out the infested house in accordance with the Law of Moses. The Law gave them seven days, but by the next it was reinfested. That is what the Matthew 21:18-26:5 narrative is about. Those five chapters cover one single day in Jerusalem. The Law required the temple's destruction.

Leviticus 14:33-48
The LORD further spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying: "When you enter the land of Canaan, which I give you for a possession, and I put a mark of leprosy on a house in the land of your possession, then the one who owns the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, 'Something like a mark of leprosy has become visible to me in the house.' The priest shall then command that they empty the house before the priest goes in to look at the mark, so that everything in the house need not become unclean; and afterward the priest shall go in to look at the house. So he shall look at the mark, and if the mark on the walls of the house has greenish or reddish depressions and appears deeper than the surface, then the priest shall come out of the house, to the doorway, and quarantine the house for seven days. The priest shall return on the seventh day and make an inspection. If the mark has indeed spread in the walls of the house, then the priest shall order them to tear out the stones with the mark in them and throw them away at an unclean place outside the city. He shall have the house scraped all around inside, and they shall dump the plaster that they scrape off at an unclean place outside the city. Then they shall take other stones and replace those stones, and he shall take other plaster and replaster the house. If, however, the mark breaks out again in the house after he has torn out the stones and scraped the house, and after it has been replastered, then the priest shall come in and make an inspection. If he sees that the mark has indeed spread in the house, it is a malignant mark in the house; it is unclean. He shall therefore tear down the house, its stones, and its timbers, and all the plaster of the house, and he shall take them outside the city to an unclean place. Moreover, whoever goes into the house during the time that he has quarantined it, becomes unclean until evening. Likewise, whoever lies down in the house shall wash his clothes, and whoever eats in the house shall wash his clothes. If, on the other hand, the priest comes in and makes an inspection and the mark has not indeed spread in the house after the house has been replastered, then the priest shall pronounce the house clean because the mark has not reappeared.

Jesus cleaned out the temple, but it didn't take one day for the infestation to return. The house had to be destroyed. Immediately after having judged the Pharisees, declaring their house desolate Jesus said,

Matthew 24:1-2
Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when his disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. And he said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down."

Now go back and re-read Lamentations 4. The enemy had entered the city long before Simon bar Giora, John of Giscala, Vespasian, or Titus did so. Josephus confirms much of the above that I have cited in the scriptures, but the fact is Josephus is unnecessary. Scripture itself tells us how to read scripture! The moment John MacArthur says the letters to the seven churches are about events in the first century he's obligated himself to be consistent with that position throughout the whole of Revelation because of how that text used oikoumenes. Only those parts of Revelation that pertain to "the things which will take place after these things" are in John's future and just because they were in John's future does not mean they are in ours .

Revelation 1:19
Therefore, write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.

1. Things John had seen (things prior to John writing Revelation),
2. Things which are (things existing at the time when Revelation was written),
3. Things which will take place after these things (things happening after John wrote Revelation - many of which occurred in the first century and not the 21st).

All of that matters when dating Revelation. If Revelation 16:14's "kings of the world" is a reference from Lamentations, then Revelation 16:14 was one of the things John had seen, not one of the things which would take place "after these things."

So..... assuming the exegesis is correct, much of or all of chapters 1, 2, 3 12, 16 and possibly 20 are all first century or before events and whether Revelation was written in the late 60s AD or the early 90s AD has no bearing whatsoever on those facts. If we were to continue to examine Revelation in this way (and it would be a very long thread to do so) we'd find only a small portion of Revelation can be about "the things which will take place after these things," and many of them would be in John's future but our past (such as the temple's destruction). We'd also find what remains makes it much more likely Revelation was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, not many years afterwards.













*The first rule of exegesis is to read the text exactly as written, with the ordinary meaning of words as found in normal usage..... unless there is reason in the surrounding text not to do so.
.

 

[CrowCross]

Revelation 3:10
Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

Many see Rev 3:10 as a future message for the church...keep you from the hour of testing refers to the removal of the Christians from the earth as the rapture. That is as being removed from the tribulation.

 

[Josheb]

When Jesus was cut off...the clock was stopped so to speak.

Prove it.

The last week has not been fulfilled.

Prove it.

The last week can be seen in the book of Revelation which hasn't happened as of yet and will begin when triggered by the rapture of the Church.

Prove it.


BUT..... before you do so..... Read Forum Rule #3. This op is about dating Revelation and, more specifically, using "internal evidence" within Revelation itself to do so. That's what this thread is about. This op is NOT about Jesus being cut off. This op is NOT about the clock stopping. This op is NOT about the last week. This op is NOT about the rapture. Anything you post that is not brought back to the topic of this opening post will be reported (and probably deleted). Save yourself the time and effort and obey the forum's rules. DO NOT HIJACK THIS OP for your own agenda.

If the content of posts 25, 26, 27 and 30 can show the necessity of an early or late date then do please make that case, but if those posts are off the stipulated topic of dating Revelation they will be deleted. Look at the example I set: I broached a number of seemingly disparate and potentially off-topic matters in posts 28 and 29 but showed how they all conspire to help date Revelation. If posts 25, 26, 27, and 30 are not intended to date Revelation from internal evidence then stop now. Post that content in a separate op. If the content of posts 25, 26, 27 and 30 can show the necessity of an early or late date then do please make that case.

 

[CrowCross]

Prove it.

Prove it.

Prove it.


BUT..... before you do so..... Read Forum Rule #3. This op is about dating Revelation. This op is NOT about Jesus being cut off. This op is NOT about the clock stopping. This op is NOT about the last week. This op is NOT about the rapture. Anything you post that is not brought back to the topic of this opening post will be reported (and probably deleted). Save yourself the time and effort and obey the forum's rules. DO NOT HIJACK THIS OP for your own agenda.

If the content of posts 25, 26, 27 and 30 can show the necessity of an early or late date then do please make that case, but if those posts are off the stipulated topic of dating Revelation they will be deleted.

No, it's right on topic. It all ties in with the scope of the dating of when Rev was written when the prophecy concerning John view of the end times.

Many apply the earlier writing in an attempt to disqualify the futurist view of the book of Revelation.

 

[Josheb]

No, it's right on topic. It all ties in with the scope of the dating of when Rev was written when the prophecy concerning John view of the end times.

Do not tell me about it. MAKE THE CASE for how Revelation should be dated using its internal evidence, and do it without hijacking @3 Resurrections' op.

Many apply the earlier writing in an attempt to disqualify the futurist view of the book of Revelation.

Completely irrelevant. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with crediting or discrediting ANY view of Revelation other than whether it is an early- or late-date work. Defending modern futurism is not the subject of discussion.

 

[CrowCross]

Do not tell me about it. MAKE THE CASE for how Revelation should be dated using its internal evidence, and do it without hijacking @3 Resurrections' op.

Completely irrelevant. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with crediting or discrediting ANY view of Revelation other than whether it is an early- or late-date work. Defending modern futurism is not the subject of discussion.

As I have said...and will repeat it....the early daters try to refute modern futurism by claiming an earlier date.

 

[Marty]

When Jesus was cut off...the clock was stopped so to speak. The last week has not been fulfilled. The last week can be seen in the book of Revelation which hasn't happened as of yet and will begin when triggered by the rapture of the Church.

I showed scripture for when the rapture happens what’s your scripture for when you say that it happens?

Remember the angel came in response to Daniels prayer in the beginning of the verify same chapter 9. Daniel was praying that prayer because he knew Jeremiahs 70 years were coming to an end and the Jews still were not repenting thus the 70 years became 70 weeks of prophecy.


1-Some people think that the 70 weeks start in 445 BC, but this is 160 years after 605 B.C. when the Jews were taken into captivity. If this was the case then the curse of the covenant would not come into effect on those who did not repent-in 535 B.C. when Jeremiah's 70 years prophecy expired. Instead it would come their grandchildren and great grandchildren which would violate the principal of the Law of Moses that children pay the price for their parents and grandparents sins.


2-It says that the anointed one will come after 62 & 7 weeks but he is cut off after 62 weeks. How can the anointed one if it is one person come 49 years after he is cut off? This proves that it is two different people. If it is Jesus how could He come 49 years after he dies?


3-Not once in the bible did Jesus or any of the new testament writers ever claim that Jesus fulfilled any parts of the 70 weeks. This would not be missed and if it was Jesus it would prove who Jesus is to the Jews Especially in the book of Matthew. Thus Jesus is not either of the anointed ones in the prophecy of the 70 weeks.

Just an FYI to all readers I‘m not trying to hijack this OP part of my point is to show that the 70 weeks are all fulfilled in the past showing that most of revelation is in the past and that there is no 70 week in our future thus adding to an earlier written date of revelation

 

[CrowCross]

I showed scripture for when the rapture happens what’s your scripture for when you say that it happens?

Remember the angel came in response to Daniels prayer in the beginning of the verify same chapter 9. Daniel was praying that prayer because he knew Jeremiahs 70 years were coming to an end and the Jews still were not repenting thus the 70 years became 70 weeks of prophecy.


1-Some people think that the 70 weeks start in 445 BC, but this is 160 years after 605 B.C. when the Jews were taken into captivity. If this was the case then the curse of the covenant would not come into effect on those who did not repent-in 535 B.C. when Jeremiah's 70 years prophecy expired. Instead it would come their grandchildren and great grandchildren which would violate the principal of the Law of Moses that children pay the price for their parents and grandparents sins.


2-It says that the anointed one will come after 62 & 7 weeks but he is cut off after 62 weeks. How can the anointed one if it is one person come 49 years after he is cut off? This proves that it is two different people. If it is Jesus how could He come 49 years after he dies?


3-Not once in the bible did Jesus or any of the new testament writers ever claim that Jesus fulfilled any parts of the 70 weeks. This would not be missed and if it was Jesus it would prove who Jesus is to the Jews Especially in the book of Matthew. Thus Jesus is not either of the anointed ones in the prophecy of the 70 weeks.

The count down has been going on for 69 weeks....this was put on hold until the time of the gentiles is to be completed....once the rapture occurs the clock will start once again.

 

[Marty]

The count down has been going on for 69 weeks....this was put on hold until the time of the gentiles is to be completed....once the rapture occurs the clock will start once again.

Once again you posted a comment without the scripture I asked for

 

[Marty]

Part 2:

Paul and Peter had preached the gospel in the courts of Nero and he did not believe. None of the kings believed the enemy could enter the gates of Jerusalem but even God's temple was infested with the enemy by the time Jesus showed up. Fire was kindled in Zion. Jeremiah was not the only prophet who predicted this. David, Isaiah, and Zephaniah did so also. Jesus referenced them all in his judgment of Jerusalem..... in the first century.

Matthew 23:34-38
"Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!"

The house (oikos) of the Pharisees was desolate. The day before, when Jesus entered Jerusalem (Mt. 21), he'd cleaned out the infested house in accordance with the Law of Moses. The Law gave them seven days, but by the next it was reinfested. That is what the Matthew 21:18-26:5 narrative is about. Those five chapters cover one single day in Jerusalem. The Law required the temple's destruction.

Leviticus 14:33-48
The LORD further spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying: "When you enter the land of Canaan, which I give you for a possession, and I put a mark of leprosy on a house in the land of your possession, then the one who owns the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, 'Something like a mark of leprosy has become visible to me in the house.' The priest shall then command that they empty the house before the priest goes in to look at the mark, so that everything in the house need not become unclean; and afterward the priest shall go in to look at the house. So he shall look at the mark, and if the mark on the walls of the house has greenish or reddish depressions and appears deeper than the surface, then the priest shall come out of the house, to the doorway, and quarantine the house for seven days. The priest shall return on the seventh day and make an inspection. If the mark has indeed spread in the walls of the house, then the priest shall order them to tear out the stones with the mark in them and throw them away at an unclean place outside the city. He shall have the house scraped all around inside, and they shall dump the plaster that they scrape off at an unclean place outside the city. Then they shall take other stones and replace those stones, and he shall take other plaster and replaster the house. If, however, the mark breaks out again in the house after he has torn out the stones and scraped the house, and after it has been replastered, then the priest shall come in and make an inspection. If he sees that the mark has indeed spread in the house, it is a malignant mark in the house; it is unclean. He shall therefore tear down the house, its stones, and its timbers, and all the plaster of the house, and he shall take them outside the city to an unclean place. Moreover, whoever goes into the house during the time that he has quarantined it, becomes unclean until evening. Likewise, whoever lies down in the house shall wash his clothes, and whoever eats in the house shall wash his clothes. If, on the other hand, the priest comes in and makes an inspection and the mark has not indeed spread in the house after the house has been replastered, then the priest shall pronounce the house clean because the mark has not reappeared.

Jesus cleaned out the temple, but it didn't take one day for the infestation to return. The house had to be destroyed. Immediately after having judged the Pharisees, declaring their house desolate Jesus said,

Matthew 24:1-2
Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when his disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. And he said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down."

Now go back and re-read Lamentations 4. The enemy had entered the city long before Simon bar Giora, John of Giscala, Vespasian, or Titus did so. Josephus confirms much of the above that I have cited in the scriptures, but the fact is Josephus is unnecessary. Scripture itself tells us how to read scripture! The moment John MacArthur says the letters to the seven churches are about events in the first century he's obligated himself to be consistent with that position throughout the whole of Revelation because of how that text used oikoumenes. Only those parts of Revelation that pertain to "the things which will take place after these things" are in John's future and just because they were in John's future does not mean they are in ours .

Revelation 1:19
Therefore, write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.

1. Things John had seen (things prior to John writing Revelation),
2. Things which are (things existing at the time when Revelation was written),
3. Things which will take place after these things (things happening after John wrote Revelation - many of which occurred in the first century and not the 21st).

All of that matters when dating Revelation. If Revelation 16:14's "kings of the world" is a reference from Lamentations, then Revelation 16:14 was one of the things John had seen, not one of the things which would take place "after these things."

So..... assuming the exegesis is correct, much of or all of chapters 1, 2, 3 12, 16 and possibly 20 are all first century or before events and whether Revelation was written in the late 60s AD or the early 90s AD has no bearing whatsoever on those facts. If we were to continue to examine Revelation in this way (and it would be a very long thread to do so) we'd find only a small portion of Revelation can be about "the things which will take place after these things," and many of them would be in John's future but our past (such as the temple's destruction). We'd also find what remains makes it much more likely Revelation was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, not many years afterwards.













*The first rule of exegesis is to read the text exactly as written, with the ordinary meaning of words as found in normal usage..... unless there is reason in the surrounding text not to do so.
.

To add to this when Jesus cleansed the temple He stated “My house” but at the end of Matthew chapter 23 He stated “your house“

 

[CrowCross]

Once again you posted a comment without the scripture I asked for

Daniel 9:27 speaks of some sort of "treaty". What it will end up being currently is anyones guess.
There are those who believe it is the current Abrahamic accord seen in the news recently.

 

[3 Resurrections]

, but the point I was making was that much of Revelation is in either John's past or John's present and therefore not in our future. Many think the binding of satan still future to us but that might not be the case. I've read about twenty commentaries on Revelation, and I do not think I have ever read one saying the millennium is past.

When I wrote before on a different website about the Rev. 20 millennium being fulfilled in the past, someone responded that a certain Catholic named Corsini had proposed the same thing. I was never able to locate that source, but it really doesn't bother me that neither you nor I have found any commentaries or scholars that state this. The book of Revelation's internal evidence proves the millennium had ended even before the time John was writing Revelation. All we have to do is compare two texts (Revelation 12:12 and Revelation 20:3 & 7) and the proof is there.

Revelation 1:19
Therefore, write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.

1. Things John had seen (things prior to John writing Revelation),
2. Things which are (things existing at the time when Revelation was written),
3. Things which will take place after these things (things happening after John wrote Revelation - many of which occurred in the first century and not the 21st).

All of that matters when dating Revelation. If Revelation 16:14's "kings of the world" is a reference from Lamentations, then Revelation 16:14 was one of the things John had seen, not one of the things which would take place "after these things."

For point #3, that verse translates better as "the things which are about to take place hereafter..." And yes, that includes the "kings of the earth" as well as the kings of the "habitable world". These are not the same thing. The "kings of the earth" are the high priests of the land of Israel, as scripture describes them in both the OT and NT, while the "kings...of the whole world" concerned the known Roman world of the first century. In the Lamentations 4:12 verse you listed about "the kings of the earth" not believing that the enemy would enter Jerusalem, this was the high priests of Israel who did not believe that their own city Jerusalem would be taken by the enemy.

You have made the point that the verses such as Revelation 3:10 regarding an imminent judgment on the "world" (oikoumenes) should be part of the dating decision for Revelation. Yet the very intended purpose of an imminent judgment on the whole world stated in this verse was "to try them that dwell upon the earth (tes ges - the land of Israel)". In other words, a judgment on the whole known world in that first century was necessary in order to judge the people of Israel, who had synagogues and a presence "scattered abroad" all over the Roman empire at the time. A judgement of God's vengeance upon the Israelites of that generation would necessarily have had to encompass all the regions of the known world where Israelites had been scattered.

Plus, the "days of vengeance" for the Israelites betraying and murdering God's Son was a sin for which the Roman world also had shared a part of that guilt. When Christ stood before Pilate, He told him, "He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin..." This meant that judgment for Christ's death by Rome's authorization also fell in part upon the known world of that first century, even if the greater share of punishment fell upon Christ's own countrymen.

"His blood be on us and our children" was a self-imposed blood oath that confined God's "days of vengeance" only upon those who conspired to slay Him, and also upon their own children of that first-century generation. That "vengeance" did not extend to any other generation beyond that one. This confines the imminent disasters of Revelation to that particular first-century generation and no later than that.

Revelation written before AD 70 when the role of high priests still existed

The simple definition of what scripture calls the "kings of the earth" is extremely important in dating Revelation. Every prophecy in John's book which mentions these "kings of the earth" must refer to a time when that office was still in existence. This term "kings of the earth" does not refer to regular monarchs of empires or kingdoms. The "kings of the earth" was a title given all the way back in Psalms 2 to the high priests of the land of Israel. Those high priests were no longer being appointed in the years following the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. So the prophecies of Revelation which describe the activities of those "kings of the earth" must of necessity must have been speaking of times when high priests in Israel were still in existence to perform those activities.

Christ referred to those "kings of the earth" and their sons being exempt from paying the yearly Temple tax in Matthew 17:24-26. This referred to the high priests and their sons who were the beneficiaries of the Temple Tax, and who were "free" from paying that obligatory tax that the rest of the adult males in Israel were supposed to pay. This exemption dated all the way back to the days of Moses' tabernacle.

The prophet David predicted of Christ's death in Psalms 2:2-3 that the "kings of the earth" and the "rulers" of the Sanhedrin took counsel together against the Lord and His anointed, in order to cast away the cords of God's control over them. The high priests of the house of Annas and the Sanhedrin most definitely conspired together to put Christ to death, as the disciples knew very well had happened, and said so in Acts 4:24-29. Those "kings of the earth" high priests of the house of Annas were then threatening the disciples, in order to suppress the gospel message.


Revelation written before AD 66

For just one example in Revelation 17:18, the "great city" Babylon was then currently reigning over the "kings of the earth". Jerusalem with its Roman governance in John's days was most definitely reigning over the high priesthood "kings of the earth". The role of high priest was only achieved by a Rome-authorized appointment in those days, lasting only until that high priest was deposed at Rome's pleasure. Even the robes of the high priest were being held (contrary to ancient Jewish custom) in the stone fortress of Antonia where the Roman troops were garrisoned, to be doled out on the feast days at Rome's discretion. The high priests could not pass a death sentence against Christ without Rome's permission to do so.

All of that Roman governance ruling over the high priesthood came to a halt in AD 66, when the Zealot rebellion threw off their Roman overlords and established their own sovereign nation of an independent nation of Israel, minting their own coinage and setting up their own governors. This means that Revelation had to have been written at a time prior to AD 66 when Rome-governed Jerusalem was still reigning over the high priest "kings of the earth".